About your Search

20130211
20130219
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6 (some duplicates have been removed)
out on this question, i agree with senator harry reid. when it came to the nomination of john bold, and in a of members of this body asked for additional disclosures from john bolton, and those disclosures were not forthcoming. harry reid said the following, the administration stonewalling has no one had the effect of slowing down the confirmation process, it has also put a further cloud over this individual and perhaps unnecessarily, raised the impression that the nominee and the white house have something to hide. i don't know if mr. hagel has received funds directly or indirectly from foreign sources, from extreme sources, but his refusal to provide disclosure i think is highly troubling. and i would suggest every member of this committee and every member of this body should stand together and at least insisting on adequate disclosure. i'll make one final point. some have asked, would you make the same request of a republican nominee? i'll point out you can chuck hagel is a republican. i don't know him personally, unlike many members of this committee. isa limit was record, and
leader harry reid. so we have a very good relationship. and i think that's one that we're going to maintain through this thing. and i would say that senator reid on numerous occasions was concerned about republican nominations. during the bush era we had steven johnson. steven johnson, who incidentally, was a democrat for the e.p.a. administrator. i thought he'd be good. i think that there are several democrats that thought he would not be good, and so harry reid did what he's supposed to do. he interceded in behalf of the democrats who opposed him. well, they had a 60-vote margin. that's fine. they got 61 votes. dirk kempthorne was one that there was objection to. he was up for -- most of you remember him, a former senator from utah. he was up for the secretary of interior, and there are some people objecting to him. and of course that was back during the bush administration. he was nominated and he went ahead and he was confirmed. it was a 60-vote margin. there's nothing unusual about this. getting back to steven johnson, this is even more analogous to what we have what now, b
to our country. the president hates it. speaker boehner he said. majority leader, harry reid, he'd say. and they created it. imagine how the rest of us feel about it. yet somehow our leaders can't seem to figure a way out of that. we all agree the country needs to find a more sustainable fiscal path. in my view we need a balanced approach as wes said a few moments ago that includes the spending and revenues. cuts in spending should focus on programs that are growing the most, not on discretionary spending, which is not growing, it's not the problem and has borne the brunt of cuts. discretionary spending as a part of the budget where america's future lies. it includes such investment as research and education. cutting investment in our future is not the way to solve this problem. yet that is exactly what the sequester will do. there's a better way. we've talked quite a bit about the impact of the sequester on an economy still recovering. i want to focus on the longer-term, the economy and the nation relieved to her children, grandchildren and great-grandchildren. the research is being c
have barack obama who is a democrat, president of the united states. then we have harry reid who is the majority leader. so the democrats are in control of both. now, if you think back at what happened back in -- during the last bush administration, we had exactly the reverse. george bush was president of the united states and the democrats were a minority. same situation. so what happened? first of all, we had bolton come up, john bolton. same thing, subjected to a 60-vote margin. we had steve -- dirk kempthorne. all remember dirk kempthorne. there are a lot of people who did not approve of him. he was appointed by bush, a republican, and then when he came over here, the democrats didn't like him, they subjected him to a 60-vote margin. that wasn't a filibuster. this isn't a filibuster today. people are trying to say that and blame me as being the bad guy that's causing a filibuster. it's not the case at all. any more than it was the case back in the 2005-2006 and other times when we had a nominee that was put forth by president bush. it was objected to by the democrats. now, di
the nomination of chuck hegel as defense secretary. yesterday majority leader harry reid filed closure on the nomination and for failing to reach agreement with republican leaders a proceeding to the nomination. if all the time for cloture is used a cloture vote will be held tomorrow, a confirmation vote could be held this coming saturday. the senate is scheduled to be in recess next week. live coverage of the u.s. senate on c-span2. the presiding officer: the senate will come to order. today's opening prayer will be offered by guest chaplain reverend ed kelaher from all saints church in chevy chase, maryland. the guest chaplain: let us pray. father god, you alone are the sovereign lord of this great nation. send your spirit among the men and women of this chamber that your will on earth may be done as it is in heaven. people suffer, children hunger, laborers strain under their burdens, and those without a voice cry out in silence. yet we stand before you at risk of doing little or nothing to comfort and relieve them, unless our hearts are yielded to you alone. there is nothing we can
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6 (some duplicates have been removed)